'The vacations are essential unless you want a neurotic judiciary': Court holidays should not be scrapped despite backlog of 62,000 cases

The Supreme Court and high courts have a huge problem of pending cases and the problem is not new.

In 1925, George Rankin found that the high court was flooded without remedy. This was examined by the S.R. Das committee (1949) the Shah Committee (1972) and Law Commission in its 14th, 44th, 48th, 58th; and more recently the 245th Report (2014) on 'Arrears and Backlog: Creating Additional Judicial (wo)manpower'.

Challenge of arrears

The challenge of arrears has proven to be formidable. The reason for this is the 'carry forward' from one year to the next.

The Supreme Court and high courts have a huge problem of pending cases and the problem is not new

Even if the carry forward is 10 per cent, the cumulative effect can be massive. The Supreme Court has earlier been cagey about disclosing the problem.

Today, the Supreme Court published data on its website but it is far from complete or incisive.

Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar

The date for April 2017 puts the arrears at 62,161 from previous month, 6,333 registered in the month while disposal for the month was 5,588.

We can see how accumulation takes place. But the Court further disguises its arrears by saying the pendency on March 31, 2017, is really 34,499 because the rest are bunch matters.

But, if only 17,453 matters are more than a year old, what's the problem?

Many attempts have been made to reduce pendency in the Supreme Court. In the early 90s all rent cases were sent to a negative judge who decided all in favour of landlords.

More recently Chief Justice Dattu took all 'bunch' land acquisition cases and disposed them off with expedition. On one afternoon, he ran through a whole list not permitting counsel to argue.

Bunching of cases is a good idea but often fails miserably. Recently, 'reservation' cases went to three different benches taking a few months to sort this out.

The Supreme Court is currently hearing the contentious Ayodhya case regarding the Babri Masjid that was razed by Hindus in 1992

One sitting judge avowedly says he does not read all the bunched cases; but disposes off the case cursorily on a foundation point.

Some judges are negative and known for 'quick' dismissals to leave the bar and clients frustrated.

This is the dark side of the Supreme Court's functioning: Disposal before justice.

Should the full court work during vacation? Some argue that the Supreme Court should have a two small two week window for vacations.

Another suggestion is that judges could stagger vacations during the year with the court functioning throughout the year.